Skip to main content

About your Search

20130302
20130310
STATION
CURRENT 21
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21
back we want to talk about some of the new laws about marijuana and colorado specifically. is there a new sheriff in town? >> do you think that marijuana should be legalized? >> i wouldn't go that far. >> let denver serve as a beacon of hope for those who know and want to know what true treatment is all about. compelling true stories. >> jack, how old are you? >> nine. >> this is what 27 tons of marijuana looks like. (vo) with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines, way inside. (vo) from the underworld, to the world of privilege. >> everyone in michael jackson's life was out to use him. (vo) no one brings you more documentaries that are real, gripping, current. [ male announcer ] to many men, shaving can be a sensitive issue. but take comfort. it may not be you; it may be your razor. upgrade to gillette fusion proglide. our micro-thin blades are thinner than a surgeon's scalpel to put less stress on your skin by gliding through hair. switch to fusion proglide. number one dermatologist recommended on sensitive skin. an
're tightening the penalties, and giving 25 years in prison and making it harsh for anyone who breaks this law. a number of republicans objected to it because they object to any sort of gun control and they don't believe this is a problem. this moves this particular pill to the full senate for cars. what is going to happen next is difficult, that is the negotiations that fall over a bipartisan effort to have background checks. this was led by senator schumer. at one point it looked like he would get the support of republican senator coburn. those fell apart. what schumer is doing he's introducing his original bill, this is a vehicle in case they're able to restart the negotiations over the background check and agree on language that will provide a vehicle on the senate floor. all four measures are expected to pass if only because democrats have a majority on the committee. and then the big key will be what happens once these get to the senate floor? will they all be tied into one bill? will they be voted separately which might increase chances of smaller pieces passing but may decrease on some
restrictive law in all of america. if they can just get rid of reading, they'll have the perfect state at least women still have the right to leave arkansas. >> barack obama takes a group of republican senators out for a fancy dinner. sean hannity demands to know why this president so obviously hates lunch. today is the birthday of bryan cranston comedian wanda sykes and the late great singer-songwriter townes van zandt. on this date, u.s.a. for africa's "we are the world" was released to the world bringing people of all nations all races and creeds together say in unison, why the hell is dan aykroyd on this record? this is "viewpoint." >> john: good evening, i'm john fuglesang. this is "viewpoint." president obama hasn't given up hopes yet for a grand bargain with republicans that would both raise taxes and slash the deficit. even if that means cutting social insurance programs which it would. but with a sequester now law despite mr. obama campaigning against it, he's now trying a new kind of outreach to the g.o.p. call it dining diplomacy. this afternoon, the president broke bread wi
leahy said: cenk: now, understand that what he's saying is that the administration has secret law. in a democracy that should be abhorrent, unacceptable. lay he is saying you can't have secret law used to execute u.s. citizens and we can't even check in on that law. the question rand paul focused on was can you kill u.s. citizens on u.s. so i am without a trial and guess what? attorney general eric holder came in and said you know what, it seemed we were saying you could, but all of a sudden, not so much. he says: cenk: that was not an additional question, that was the core question. he put in a couple of qualifiers there to have wiggle room as an attorney, of course be so they probably can kill u.s. citizens on u.s. soil under different circumstances. rand paul when asking about it seem somewhat satisfied with the answer. >> are you satisfied? >> i'm quite happy with the answer. i'm disappointed it took a month and a half and root canal to get it. that's what i've been asking all along. cenk: let's bring in a couple of experts, andrew kirell and colonel morris davis was chief pro
and then the potential for law enforcement, as well as commercial enterprises to use this technology, as well, so there is a multi-facetted problem that i think citizens ought to be concerned about. in fact, you may ever seen today where the attorney general sent a memo to rand paul who had asked the question about whether the president could authorize a drone strike in the u.s. michael: let's take a leukoowe colonel davis, i want to interrupt you so we can take a look at that letter and the viewers can see it. this is an answer to that letter which you provided us: michael: that does actually at least create a third conversation about drones, a third way of discussing them, doesn't it? >> right. it should be concerning, i would hope, to the american public that this possibility that the president could decide to launch a drone strike here in the u.s. on u.s. citizens. if you read the letter, it starts out saying we've never done this before, we've got no intention of doing this, we've got great law enforcement and great federal coats but hey you know, it's possible there could be some extraordin
they would know that -- >> pretty sure isn't good enough a court of law. >> caller: well, i'm pretty sure they wouldn't do this without knowing the full consequences -- >> stephanie: well, we were talking about [ inaudible ]. you are right, it's a tough, but this guy -- >> caller: but he defected. he renounced his citizenship. these are not rights that are guarantees to you, regardless no matter what. eventually you come to a point where you give up these rights. >> but sometimes you get the wrong guy, and do we want to live in a country like that? >> caller: it could happen, but i'm just saying you know, i just believe in the greater -- you know, in the end -- i -- i just don't think that this hypothetical situation would really come true first of all, and i think people are just really overreacting. >> stephanie: i'm with you on that. jim you were even saying maybe we should have brought osama bin laden to trial -- you know what i'm fine. >> caller: even the guy that we executed and accidentally killed his 16-year-old son, it was like this guy renounced his citizensh
. today you issued a statement about former dea chiefs who are calling on president to nullify state laws. you said it's arrogant that these former dea chiefs encourage the president to full my state marijuana laws. the fact that these former dea chiefs are so focused on marijuana possession is why we have lost the war on drugs. congressman, if we lost the war on drugs what should federal policy be going forward? >> where states have legalized we ought to see how it works. how does possession, legalization work and what happens. then the other states can learn from it. you shouldn't nullify the people's voice. the people are the ultimate powers. when you have a referendum, i think it's wrong for these former dea heads to not realize that they were fighting a losing war. it's against crack heroin and cocaine, not marijuana. we spent too much time and money on marijuana, ruined too many lives who can't get jobs, couldn't get scholarships, federal housing and have a big red "m" on their chest for smokerring marijuana. that's not what america is about. those people were out of touch when they
the house and the senate and it will be signed into law. there are very few people who are on the defense of background check side in this debate. the american people are solidly behind it. and once the folks who are dragging their feet and those who claim now to be opposed to it start hearing from folks back home, i think it is going to be a whole different situation. as you pointed out in the clip leading into this, you can't be against criminals getting guns and you can't be against the dangerously mentally ill getting guns and be against background checks. that's the first line of defense. one thing we can do to check folks, to screen folks to make sure that guns don't fall into the hands of the wrong people and create problems in our communities. >> john: i examine tell you how nice it is to hear a democrat say that. it is one of the things we haven't heard from any of our republican friends. what are the republicans and nra members doing to keep guns from falling into the hands of possible criminals. republicans are citing concerns over the formation of a national gun registry as th
crystals. ice breakers. >> do you not get a chance to explain yourself in a court of law before you get a hell fire missile dropped on your head? i think we really -- it just amazing me that people are so willing and eager to throw out the bill of rights and just say oh, that's fine, you know, terrorists are a big threat to us, and, you know, i'm so fearful that they will attack me that i'm willing to give up my rights? i think we give up too easily. >> michael: that's kentucky republican senator rand paul railing against the use of drones during his filibuster of john brennan's nomination to head the cia. he says the drone program is unconstitutional and raises questions about whether it would allow the government to target u.s. citizens on u.s. soil. joining us now to talk about that alan dershowitz joining us tonight. welcome into "the war room." >> thank you. >> michael: attorney general eric holder said that a drone strike against an american could be constitutional. do you agree with him? >> could be constitutional. that's the danger of answering hypothetical q
do under the laws of war is target an enemy combatant at anytime anywhere. the president can designate such a combatant if he belongs to an enemy that has taken up arms against the u.s. this does not include hanoid jane. arguing we need more than political stunts that fire up kids in their college dorms. [ applause ] >> stephanie: fight! fight! fight! this just in by the way -- [♪ "world news tonight" theme ♪] >> stephanie: this actually puts the republicans once again on the side of -- >> right. >> stephanie: regardless of what our concerns are, despite controversy, a new poll shows majority of americans on both sides of the aisle support the program. last year 55% of americans approved. 56% now approve, just 26% disapprove. >> i approve of foreign program but not a domestic program. >> stephanie: this is what the attorney general just explained. what if it is an emmy combatant. he -- this is -- eric holder letter. >> quote, does the president have the authority to use a whe onized drone to kill an american not engaged in combat on american soil? the
an analogy to the use of torture. there are american laws and international laws against the use of torture. now, george bush said that he could override that, right, as president. and he could use torture because he believes we got good information. he violated international law and was never held responsible for it. president obama disagrees with president bush on torture but president obama does believe his executive authority gives him an unlimited ability to use drones as killing machines overseas and now we know in the united states of america. and i think that pushes the authorization too far as well. >> absolutely. >> bill: those are all of the questions that have not been answered. look, there are always going to be wars. there are always going to be drones, now we know. and i'm not saying ban drones, shoot, put them all down and never use them again. but there has to be some guiding policy on when the use of a drone is acceptable and when its's not for what purpose against whom and that policy i believe also should be made by congress, not the president of the united states. we do
, on your radio, and on current tv this is the "bill press show." >> bill: osama bin laden's son-in-law comes to new york city in chains and he appears in court today. what do you say? good morning, everybody. another good victory, lots of good work there by the cia rounding him up another top al-qaeda leader. good to see you today on this friday march 8th. ♪ hallelujah ♪ >> bill: friday friday, friday our favorite day. ♪ hallelujah ♪ >> bill: they are getting some things done finally in the united states congress. it's good to see you. we'll tell you what is happening here in our national capitol. you'll find us just down the street from our united states capitol building. thanks for joining us this morning. we'll tell you what is going on and give you a chance to sound off about it. that's what is fun about the program, we love hearing from you. give us a call at 866-55-press. that's the toll free number 866-557-7377. and the social media keeps humming thanks to you @bpshow and on facebook at facebook/billpressshow, join us let us know what you think about
laws of the united states for the president to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the united states. well now that should make every citizen guaranteed due process by the constitution feel safe. let's bring in aclu senior legislative counsel christopher anders and raha wala, advocacy counsel in the law and security program at human rights first. thank you both for coming on the show tonight. christopher, how string is it when i have someone from the aclu on to support the actions of senator rand paul who is quoteing groan greenwald charles pierce on the senate floor. >> i think what's really key here is that this issue has been around for a couple of years but the senate over the last couple of weeks, they have focused in on this very broad claims the president has made that he can order the killing of people far from any battlefield including the united states citizens. and what senator paul asked is a very simple question. it was do you mr. president believe you have the authority to kill american citizens use a drone to kill american citizens on
like the health care law and financial regulations. just the stuff they don't like. it's like kids pulling out the vegetables they don't like. >> hiding the carrots -- >> stephanie: right. i used to throw the peas under the bench that i sat on. >> obama: it is an area of deep concern. i think everybody knows where i stand on this issue. we're going to manage it the best we can to try to minimize the effects on american families. >> stephanie: and then homeland security secretary. >> we are already seeing the big airports for example. some had very long lines. >> stephanie: like you were saying, there is going to be inconvenience -- [ screaming ] >> what is happening? i'm personally being inconvenienced! this is serious now. >> stephanie: and there is shocking there may be delays at lax. [♪ dramatic music ♪] >> if i even start talking about airports i will never leave this room. because the anger in me -- if i had a little vodka in me i would pull a rock star violence on this studio. >> stephanie: yeah. >> and there's really no airports where i go -- sometimes
-gun measures a felony in pennsylvania. mr. metcalf said he wants to make gun laws to make it unapproachable from the government tyranny. the wtf-ness of metcalf gets more wtfy. he said we'll never allow the left to benefit from the wicked acts of murders to enhance their gun grabbing agenda. but he seems perfectly allowing mass murderers to amass their gun agendas and when they have a gun it often results in mass murders. wtf, pennsylvania. our nation was founded in you're fine state. you're a great state. you produced rocky and fired rick santorum. philadelphia was where our constitution was form. now mr. metcalf wants to pass an unconstitutional law. >> john: welcome back to "viewpoint." we asked our viewers to comment via twitter or facebook on the sequester, and john scott g posted this on my facebook page. the democrats are to blame for thinking that sanity and common sense would prevail in congress. i agree john scott that was pretty insane thing for democrats to think. that's like expecting the joker to be let out of arkham asylum for good behavior, and yes in answer to your question
. the company's sec filing indicated likely violations related to bribery law. they put out a news release titled . . . it calls the wyoming times coverage of the reporting inflammatory and defamatory. we'll be watching how this further influences adelson's political spending. coming up there is a saying -- they are saying you believe in something, and then there is going to the mat for it. daryl hannah has proven herself an environmental lead words and deeds. and why is the sports world so far behind the curve when it comes to the lbgt movement. and the message of hate continues. we'll take you behind the scenes of an exclusive current tv documentary. it's monday night in "the war room," and we are just getting started. billy zane stars in barabbas. coming in march to reelz. to find reelz in your area, go to reelz.com the chill of peppermint. the rich dark chocolate. york peppermint pattie get the sensation. >> if you believe in state's rights but still support the drug war you must be high. >> "viewpoint" digs deep into the issues of the day. >> do you think that ther
be necessary and appropriate under the constitution and applicable laws of the united states for the president to authorize the military to use lethal force within this territory of the united states. for example the president could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force as necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack like the one suffered on december 7 1941, and september 11 2011. nice touch bringing fear mongering in it. on september 11th tea 11th we arrested a whole bunch of muslims who were innocent. we would have executed them and then, whoops, it turns out they were innocent. this is grotesque. let's bring you michael shure and luke from the "huffington post." luke, let me start with you. see if you can answer the question for me that i've been asking all day on twitter and here as you saw in the first segment. where are the so-called progressive democrats who would have been on fire if this was the bush administration? >> well, i mean, i think civil liberties aren't really a left-right issue. i mean, many democrats w
'm talking about. i work in radio so i'm qualified to say whatever i want to say. it would be the law. what a show we've got coming up today. our good friend igor volsky is coming in, managing editor from the think progress. plus we've got lots of sports to talk about from cindy boren from "the washington post." dan, you mention charleston. that's my hometown. we'll be talking to two cookbook authors, the lee brothers who you've seen on the cooking shows. we'll talk to them about that. and "buzzfeed"'s washington bureau chief john stanton plus art historian roger gaston is the producer of an exciting documentary, cool disco dan. if you don't know who disco dan is, we'll let you know. >> i'm saying it is not me. cool disco dan. >> no. no one's ever called you cool disco dan. no one has ever called you cool, i hear cyprian pointing out. >> my 8-year-old cousin has. >> we have all of that stuff coming up and a great show today. but first -- >> this is the "full court press." >> here's cool disco dan. >> joe flacco signed his contract yesterday. he had quite the post-contract signing meal. afte
craft that in law where you can have a path to citizenship where there isn't an incentive for people to come illegally, i'm for it. i don't have a problem with that. i don't see how you do it. i'm not smart enough to figure out every aspect of a really complex law. >> imagine that -- imagine admitting he's not smart. >> stephanie: i'm the smart one. >> thought jeby was the smart one. >> stephanie: he doesn't stand by what he wrote in his book because he wrote that last year. >> last year is last year, come on! [ ♪ "world news tonight" ♪ ] >> stephanie: george h.w. did it wrote a book. >> wrote a book. didn't. to do it but did it. >> stephanie: it offers intimate observations about the low points of his son's presidency. that's got to be quite a large volume. >> reames and reames. >> stephanie: discovering the low points would be -- what were the high points? i love this part. he writes my heart went out to him after hurricane katrina. oh, to his son. >> not to the people of new orleans! no. >> stephanie: because he was treated so unfairly. >> heck of a job. >> stephanie: he said
into this. technically, obama did move first on spending. obama signed into law a set of bills that cut $1.8 trillion from discretionary spending including no tax increases at all. one of the bills the budget control act gave us the sequester so you could argue they included closer to $3 trillion in spending cuts without a single tax increase. it didn't seem to move trust. so far the republicans haven't proposed any further tax increases but obama has proposed quite a few spending cuts including medicare. >> john: and raising the medicare age. >> stephanie: the bottom line is republicans won't agree to further tax increases so there's no deal to be had. he goes on to say the truth comes out. republicans won't make a deal that includes further taxes. they want to get the white house to implement their agenda in return for nothing. there's no deal even if obama agrees to demands there is no deal because republicans don't want to make a deal that includes taxes no matter what they get in return for it. the interesting question is whether the possibility of a government shutdown, a debt ceilin
't make a lot of decisions about how to do this in the best way because of the way the law is written this is going to affect the economy. >> i think the administration has done a good job of taking their time and saying this is what is going to happen if sequestration goes through. they brought out the heads of several different agencies ray lahood from transportation who is a republican, and sort of said, this is what will happen. we will have our hands tied on a lot of things that we should not have our hands tied on and if you think that less government is good, then you don't really understand what is going on here because there are a lot of vital services that are provided by the government that you will lose. and it's the age-old classic problem that certain republicans don't understand the role of government. and no matter how hard barack obama and the administration ties to say we have to have these things republicans refuse to acknowledge it. >> jamal: yes. and by april 1st, you'll start to see some real damage. and people talk about cutting government al
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21